The report goes right out and states up front: terror camps are all over Libya with direct ties to Al Qaeda. So much for Al Qaeda being dead, Mr. President. You haven’t dismantled anything, you’re “smart diplomacy” has actually revived terrorist groups in the Middle East and elsewhere.

“Libya is a lesson in what the international community can achieve and is a recipe for the future.”

Yeah, a lesson in how to get the weapons you need to carry out your plots, courtesy of this administration. All you’ll get is harsh condemnations from Panetta, and possibly a drone strike or ten, while this administration sends more weapons, financial “aid” and other goodies to arm more terrorists rebels in the region. Threats mean little when it was that easy to take out a U.S. consulate and kill 4 Americans in Libya. Drone strikes aren’t deterring, they’re ticking off these groups. Benghazi was clear proof of that. Al Qaeda isn’t backing down, they are energized.

Hillary Clinton is set to testify this week, assuming she doesn’t wipe out again. I’m sure her testimony will be less than enlightening and full of more buck passing.

“I was not personally aware of any request,” Obama said Friday, adding that there is an “infrastructure” in place to “manage requests.” – Source: Fox News

Hillary Clinton seems incapable of throwing Obama under his own bus. Perhaps I am underestimating her — after all, she is married to the Teflon President. Maybe she’ll actually give some useful information. Some questions Clinton should be asked, which may be redundant with other hearings to date, but are valid since no one has sufficiently answered them:

Where are the survivors? Why has the committee not been given access to them?

Why, after multiple requests, did you not reinforce the Benghazi consulate? We know Clinton requested it and Obama denied it. Hillary and Bill put together a legal team, so clearly some big piece in this picture is Hillary’s to play show and tell with.

Why the lie about a YouTube Video being to blame? Who decided that was the official cover story? The average citizen watching this unfold could tell you this was not about a stupid YouTube trailer — especially not one that only had a hundred or so hits on the day protests broke out. The President, thirteen days later, continued to push this lie but not just on the American people — he did it in front of the U.N. in a globally televised speech. Let us not forget useful stooge, Susan Rice, in this lying either. Haven’t heard a peep about her since she sent her sob letter to the President. Come to think of it, Obama’s debate defender, Candy Crowley, has been silent as well.

Just a reminder of the lies and the liars headed into this week’s testimony:

Al Qaeda out of Mali taking responsibility, however who knows where they were based out of at the time when they launched the attack.:

Whatever the goal, the message of the militant takeover of the gas complex, in a country that has perhaps the world’s toughest record for dealing with terrorists, seemed clear, at least to Algerian officials: the Islamist ministate in northern Mali, now under assault by French and Malian forces, has given a new boost to transnational terrorism. The brigade of some 32 Islamists that took the plant was multinational, Algerian officials said — with only three Algerians in the group.

“We have indications that they originated from northern Mali,” one of the senior officials said. “They want to establish a terrorist state.”

A Mali-based Algerian jihadist with ties to Al Qaeda, Mokhtar Belmokhtar, has claimed responsibility through spokesmen — and is blamed by the Algerians — for masterminding the raid.

The militants who attacked the plant said it was in retaliation for the French troops sweeping into Mali this month to stop an advance of Islamist rebels south toward the capital, although they later said they had been planning an attack in Algeria for some time. The group that attacked the plant, thought to be based in Gao, Mali, was previously little known and had splintered last year from Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, Al Qaeda’s North African branch.

Share this:

Like this:

LikeLoading...

Related

About ladyliberty1885

A.P. Dillon resides in the Triangle area of North Carolina and is the founder of LadyLiberty1885.com. Her current and past writing can also be found at Da Tech Guy Blog, StopCommonCoreNC.org, WatchdogWireNC and WizBang.
Her current writing project is a children’s book series.

Some who have asked questions about the Incident at Benghazi are disappointed in the congressional investigation so far. The most important question that needs to be asked and answered for them is, “Who gave the order to ‘stand down’ at Benghazi?” Once that question is answered, the rest of what happened there may fall into place.

“According to a Fox News report by Jennifer Griffin, former Navy Seals Ty Woods and Glen Doherty…were ordered to stand down three times following calls during the attack. The first two times occurred soon after they heard initial shots fired…and (they) requested permission to go to the consulate to help out…”

The Examiner.com claims “…former House speaker Newt Gingrich…was informed by a U. S. senator that at least two media networks have recently been given…evidence about the Sept. 11 Benghazi attacks that killed four Americans…”

“The networks obtained e-mail evidence from…the office of National Security Advisor James Jones…ordering a counterterrorism team to cancel a rescue mission at the U. S. consulate and CIA annex in Libya. According to Gingrich…they were told explicitly by the White House ‘stand down and do nothing. This is not a terrorist action.’”

If there is a cover-up about what happened at Benghazi, then the cover-up is not about inadequate security but about covering up why no one in the White House helped while Americans fought for their lives. We know now there was ample time to send help to save ambassador Stevens, if a decision was made to do so. This is Jeffery Kuhner point.

Jeffery Kuhner writes in WorldTribune.com, “Two hours after the assault began the State Department sent an e-mail to numerous agencies–including the White House Situation Room–that Ansar al-Sharia, a terror group affiliated with Al Qaida, had claimed responsibility.”

Dave Hodges adds creditability to the Gingrich statements about an order to stand down at Benghazi. Hodges claims on his radio show, “There is now proof that Obama was warned in advance of the coming attack in which Stevens begged for more protection and his impassioned plea was denied by Clinton.”

“As Stevens was begging for help after the attack had begun, General Hamm had activated a special forces team within minutes of learning that the embassy, which was really a CIA safe house, was under attack.”

“When General Ham received his “stand down” orders from Obama, he made plans to go ahead with the rescue and was arrested within minutes of contravening he order by his second in command, General Rodriquez.”

Contrary to theses statements by Gingrich and Hodges, on November 1, 2012, Mark Hosenball reported for Reuters, “Following the initial broadcast of the Fox News report, Jennifer Youngblood, a CIA spokeswoman, denied that CIA had ever turned down requests for help from U.S. personnel in Benghazi. ‘No one at any level in the CIA told anybody not to help those in need; claims to the contrary are simply inaccurate,’ Youngblood said.”

Youngblood’s statement does not refer to the Department of Defense, the Department of State or even the White House. They all could have denied help. Nor does it clear up the comments made by Newt Gingrich about the ignored calls for assistance.

The night of the attack, at around 11:00 pm, a Department of Defense drone arrived over Benghazi to help gather information. Someone must have known then that things were not going well and that help was needed.

Weeks later, the FBI was at Benghazi to do an investigation, but for only a few hours. How many witnesses did they interview? What did they find out? The man who led the attack on our “mission” at Benghazi is reported giving interviews on Arabic TV.

In a report issued by the Accountability Review Board at the end of December 2012, the board blamed “systematic State Department management and leadership failures,” for the Incident at Benghazi.” No individuals were named or held responsible for the systematic failures.

The report went on to say, “The Board found no evidence of any undue delays in decision making or denial of support from Washington or from the military combatant commanders.” There was no mention of the Gingrich claim about a stand down order, nor has Speaker Gingrich come forward with evidence to challenge the board’s conclusion.

Summing up the ARB’s finding on the Incident at Benghazi, Darrell Issa writes, “The report does not tell the public who is responsible for the assault itself. Clearly, all the questions have not been answered because we still don’t know–or the administration won’t say–who was behind this terrorist attack.” Clearly, the Incident at Benghazi was not a spontaneous demonstration against an insulting video.

Hodges and Gingrich ought to testify before Congress about their claims regarding a stand down order. Are these men trying to drum up an audience for their own ends, or are they trying to get at the truth?

If for no other reason, we ought to answer the question about who ordered the attack and who gave the alleged stand down order to set the minds of our men and women in military service at ease. They want to be assured someone has their back.

In short, four men are dead and the mercuric system in Washington is to blame. Right. And Julius Caesar just ended up dead, too. “Et tu Brute? Then fall Caesar!” No betrayal here. Move on.